CMNT_TITLE

With reference also to its observation under the Convention and further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its reports.

Articles 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Further to its previous observation, the Committee notes that, where there is a threat to the health or safety of the workers within the meaning of Article 13 of the Convention, the Minister of Labour can, under the terms of section 84 of the Labour Code, order the closure or total or partial suspension of work at an establishment where an infraction is noted until such time as the infraction is remedied, if the employer, having been given prior warning, fails to takes steps within the prescribed time limits to remedy the infraction. Proceedings against the person responsible for the infraction are initiated by the Minister of Labour and the penalty is a fine, the minimum and maximum amounts of which are fixed by the same section of the Labour Code. The Committee also notes that, under section 9, labour inspectors may, in circumstances other than those provided for in Article 13, apply to the Minister of Labour for an order to close the establishment if the employer fails to remedy the violation within a set period. The offender is ordered by a court to end the violation and fined. Lastly, section 133 of the Code also provides for fines in the case of violations of certain of its provisions and section 139 provides for fines for any violation of the Code or any regulations issued thereunder for which no fine has been set.

The aforementioned provisions of the Labour Code are not clear with regard to the respective roles of the authorities empowered to act on behalf of the Minister of Labour which, under the terms of section 3(a) of Regulations No. 56 of 1996, should come under the supervisory responsibilities of the labour inspectors, as the Government indicates in referring in this context to section 9 of the Code. The Committee points out that it is vitally important for the application of these fundamental provisions of the Convention that the authority of labour inspectors to carry out their mandate of monitoring the application of legislation must be expressly established in the texts which form the legal basis of their activities. The Committee would also point out that it may be useful to draw a distinction between measures which inspectors may be called on to take with a view to remedying situations that may constitute a threat to the health or safety of workers (Article 13) and measures taken to record and punish violations (Articles 17 and 18). In this regard, the Committee draws the Government's attention to its 1985 General Survey on labour inspection (paragraphs 179 to 185, concerning the powers of injunction of inspectors, and paragraphs 253 to 267, concerning proceedings and penalties). The Committee hopes that the Government has taken the necessary measures to adopt implementing regulations for the above provisions of the Labour Code and Regulations No. 56 of 1996, and that it will provide copies for the ILO in the near future.

Article 10. The Government indicates in its report that labour inspectors are provided with offices in the labour inspection directorate and that these offices are suitably equipped and easily accessible to all persons concerned. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether these offices are made available to inspectors when needed, on a temporary basis, or whether they are permanently assigned to the inspectors.

Article 12, paragraph 1(a) and (b). The Committee notes that, in accordance with Article 16, workplaces are visited regularly and that the inspection visits are normally carried out at establishments where violations of legislation have been reported. The Committee also notes that section 5 of Regulations No. 56 of 1996 stipulates that inspection visits must be comprehensive. However, it follows both from the provisions of this text and from the information provided by the Government that, contrary to the Convention, the freedom of inspectors to enter establishments under their supervision is limited to working hours. The Committee draws the Government's attention to the fact that labour inspectors should be entitled to enter any workplace liable to inspection at any time of the day or night (subparagraph (a)), and should have the right to enter by day any premises which they may have reasonable cause to believe to be liable to inspection (subparagraph (b)). The Committee draws the Government's attention to its comments on this matter in its 1985 General Survey (paragraphs 167 and 168). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to these provisions of the Convention and to provide in its next report information on the measures taken or contemplated for this purpose.

Articles 14 and 21. The Committee notes with interest that the provisions of Chapter X of the Labour Code (obligations of employers in the event of industrial accidents and occupational illnesses) also apply to workers as defined in section 2 of the Code who are not covered by the social security system. Noting that section 9 of the Labour Code requires an employer to notify any cases of industrial accidents and occupational diseases, and referring to its previous observation in which it noted the absence in the annual inspection reports of statistics relating to occupational diseases (Article 21(g)), the Committee notes that, despite the title of Chapter X, its provisions concern industrial accidents only, not occupational diseases. The Committee also notes once again that statistics on occupational diseases are still not being communicated to the ILO. Referring again to its general observation of 1996, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this provision of the Convention and to communicate to the Office the texts governing the procedure for the notification of occupational diseases as provided in section 9 of the Labour Code.